If there’s one thing a reporter or editor gets used to real quick, it’s criticism. Whether they can spell the word right off the bat is a crapshoot. But criticism is something we in newspapers deal with a lot, and how each reporter or editor handles it is about as varied as a tiger’s stripes. I knew one reporter who treated them like trophies and hung them on his cubicle wall – the worse the better. I knew another reporter who read them only far enough to realize he was reading a criticism and then dumped them in the trash. Most of us, however, read and assess them for their merit. I would say 99% of all criticism that comes in is a matter of opinion and goes unresponded to. And it seems that there’s a natural balance to the letters we receive. For every negative letter that comes on a topic, a positive one follows (or vice versa), enforcing that each is a matter opinion and that we as journalists are doing our jobs. People are reading!
The best criticism is, of course, constructive. And the more controlled it comes at us, the more seriously we take it.
For me, personally, if there’s one criticism that I take very seriously, no matter its tone, is the letter that questions or outright attacks either my, the Sun Day’s, or a Sun Day reporter’s journalistic integrity.
After the June 2 edition came out, we received three letters in response to Sun Day Reporter Dwight Esau’s article “Outskirts,” which briefly discussed churches operating on or in other Del Webb OR other senior-living communities. One letter was a short and fiery little thing, another was right down the middle with bulleted points as to where the Sun Day went wrong (in the reader’s opinion), and the other was controlled and so respectful that the reader credited us for trying to cover such a sensitive topic as a church operating on Sun City’s property.
The merit of the “Outskirts” article, though, will not be addressed here. We’re researching the topic further, and an official statement is forthcoming in our June 30 edition. I will say, though, that Dwight Esau’s preliminary reporting on this matter is solid and solidly rooted in his journalistic integrity.
The reason this topic is generating such response (yes, I consider three letters SUCH a response) is that it’s somewhat of a hybrid topic of the two topics that always garner a lot of debate: religion and politics. And when an issue that involves one or both of these monsters boils up from a community, it catches a newspaper’s attention, and sooner or later someone will throw out the B word: bias.
Ever since we’ve been reporting on the governing board’s decision to sign a contract with Christ Community Church to operate on Sun City’s property, a few readers have accused us of being biased on this topic. And I take a few seriously, especially when they use the word bias.
In short, the Sun Day is not biased. We are doing our best to report accurately and fairly on a topic that in most every instance would be considered a powder keg by media professionals.
More so, if readers knew my personal relationship with Sun City’s governing board or churches for that matter (not to say I don’t believe in God, I do strongly), this wouldn’t even be a question. My apologies for any confusion, though.
On a brighter note, we would like to introduce Mason Souza, whose name most of you will probably recognize from the numerous articles he has already written for the Sun Day, as a full-time intern for the duration of the summer. Last edition, Mason began his internship with a bright-and-early tour of the printing facilities on Tuesday morning, after a rigorous week of reporting, writing, and assuming his first set of layout duties. Throughout the summer, Mason will have a well-rounded and inclusive education on all aspects of working on and running a newspaper, including building managing editor skills.
We are very proud and grateful to have him on staff with us this summer.
